Appeal No. 2002-0882
Application 09/161,146
prior art corroborate the appellants’ position that the examiner
has engaged in an impermissible hindsight reconstruction of the
invention set forth in independent claims 1 and 14 by using these
claims as blueprints to selectively piece together isolated
disclosures in the prior art. Accordingly, we shall not sustain
the standing 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection of claims 1 and 14, and
dependent claims 2, 10 through 12, 15 and 16, as being
unpatentable over Showalter in view of Morscheck and the admitted
prior art.
As neither Kojima nor Asahara cures the above noted
shortcomings in the examiner’s evidentiary showing, we also shall
not sustain the standing 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection of
dependent claims 3 through 5 as being unpatentable over Showalter
in view of Morscheck, the admitted prior art and Kojima, or the
standing 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection of dependent claim 13 as
being unpatentable over Showalter in view of Morscheck, the
admitted prior art and Asahara.
SUMMARY
The decision of the examiner to reject claims 1 through 5
and 10 through 16 is reversed.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007